Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm interested in preserving civil liberties, but it's tough when there's so much misinformation out there.

I have to fact check everything, and frequently find these alarmist articles to have nothing behind them. If the powers-that-be are conspiring against us, a big part of their methodology must be blowing all this smoke in our faces so that whenever we see a "big brother" or conspiracy story we immediately assume it's false.

I'd like more facts in articles like this, e.g. the specific wording in the proposed law that requires transmission, not just recording, of data.



Once the data is recorded, it's only a matter of time before it becomes convenient to use in wider and wider contexts. The problem with requiring transmission to begin with is the infrastructure (business, legal, etc., not just tech) for all that doesn't really exist yet. But if in the future your fridge has an IP address, it's unlikely your car won't. With both data and connectivity, it would be a small decision to put the two together - an over the air firmware update and your car could be compliant within a few weeks of a new law.


This is logic that suggests we should also outlaw hard drives. Who knows what the government might find out about us in the future by passing some terrible law?


We can control hard drives - not just with software, but with encryption the government is (hopefully) unable to break.

If we had the same degree of control over these recorders, I'd be less concerned.


I would have no problem with an article that made the argument you just made. I do have a problem with an article that says "the primary function of the black box devices would be to record and transmit data" when the "transmit" part is pulled out of thin air. This bill does not require technology that enables active tracking.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: